The Constitution specifically allows for Congressional secrecy and military contractors

Article I, Section 5:

Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members, and a Majority of each shall constitute a Quorum to do Business; but a smaller Number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the Attendance of absent Members, in such Manner, and under such Penalties as each House may provide.

Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.

Each House shall keep a Journal of its Proceedings, and from time to time publish the same, excepting such Parts as may in their Judgment require Secrecy; and the Yeas and Nays of the Members of either House on any question shall, at the Desire of one fifth of those Present, be entered on the Journal.

Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other Place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.

Doesn't seem to be any limit on the secrecy power in the Constitution.

29. I doubt they anticipated private contractors like Booz Allen in quite the same way either

Would the founding fathers want a group of investors like The Carlyle Group,

who owns Booz Allen, to be privately in charge of some of America's most important military functions.

Wouldn't this seem utterly insane in light of the fact that The Carlyle Group was required to pay a $20 million dollar fine for allegedly bribing a public employee with millions of dollars?

So those that keep blaming Obama should focus on the real problem here. The private contractors and the NSA.

The NSA private contractor entanglement is the two headed monster that continues to violate the laws of the land while the private contractors take none of the blame for the transgressions that have transpired....

The entanglement by private contractors needs to end! Donald Rumsfeld was a huge fan of privatizing the military and many of his supporters are part of the Carlyle Group! George Herbert Walker Bush, ex head of the CIA, use to be on the Carlyle board!

And now in 2009 the Carlyle Group gets busted colluding with former Goldmann Sachs employees allegedly bribing a public official for millions of dollars yet they still get to own Booz Allen and make billions in profits.

54. I agree. Private contractors shouldn't be involved in any of this. n/t

55. Thank you for replying. I'm sorry if I've been annoying & repetitive on this issue

As one who has protested wars for many years I take civil rights for all people very seriously.

I am as staunch on this issue as I am in my support for universal healthcare. No person should be denied quality health care based on income inequality.

However, I do support the right for free enterprise to compete with universal health care if it is transparent and regulated fairly. There is nothing wrong with honest profits, competition, and incentive for innovation if it improves the health and/or everyday lives of Americans

Looking at the numbers though universal healthcare is statistically kicking American insurance based health care's ass.

Though no system is perfect I believe universal health care has been shown to be more humane and cost effective based on consistent study findings.

To be fair part of America's poor health findings according to a the recent report by the National Research Council are social factors.

The research council found that social factors like traffic fatalities & guns also affected the data:

U.S. Ranks Below 16 Other Rich Countries In Health Report

by Richard Knox January 09, 2013 5:47 PM

It's no news that the U.S. has lower life expectancy and higher infant mortality than most high-income countries. But a magisterial new says Americans are actually less healthy across their entire life spans than citizens of 16 other wealthy nations.

And the gap is steadily widening.

"What struck us — and it was quite sobering — was the recurring trend in which the U.S. seems to be slipping behind other high-income countries," the lead author of the report, Dr. , tells Shots.

~Snip~

The panel concludes that part of the nation's poor ranking can be attributed to problems with its $2.6 trillion-a-year health care system (the world's most expensive by far). Those problems include the 50 million Americans without health insurance, fewer doctors per capita, less access to primary care and fragmented management of complex chronic diseases.

But the new report places more stress on nonmedical shortcomings.

~Snip~

Guns have a lot to do with the homicide and accidental deaths. The report notes that murder rates involving guns are 20 times higher in the U.S. than in 22 other rich countries.

"Clearly we need to do something about violence and firearm-related homicides if we're going to close the gap," Woolf says. "It's a major contributor to the loss of years of life in our country among young people."

12. I can think of plenty that aren't classified

14. Thanks. I guess we will just have to take the govt's word that they are not violating the spirit

of the law in their interpretation of it.

In light of John Yoo's famous constitutional interpretations I am confident my govt will make the right decision in complete secrecy....

Wikiedia: John Woo Publications

With the separation of powers, Yoo has argued that each branch of government has the authority to interpret the Constitution for itself, which provides the justification for judicial review by the federal courts. In international law, Yoo has written that the rules governing the use of force must be understood to allow nations to engage in armed intervention to end humanitarian disasters, rebuild failed states, and stop terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

Hopefully the interpretation is nothing like John Yoo's. I am using it to make a point that other admins have made some egregious decisions. and making these decisions in secret whether legally and ethically made it is unknown and that is not a good precedent considering the precedent already set by john Yoo and the Bush administration.

53. The Democratic Underground.com is a wonderful place to learn and share.

I've learned a lot here about politics and forum discourse.

One of the biggest things I'm still learning is to be respectful and tolerant though I do my share of wrangling. Can't claim to be a saint and I still have to check myself and my level of civility.

I'm sure there are a few here that would attest I've been rude in discussions. For what it's worth that's a stain I must live with and I still get a bit snarkier on occasions than I'm comfortable with. I do try to edit out snarkiness and try to apologize if I see that I've gone over the top.

After all the person you disagree on one of your pet issues may agree with you on many other issues out there. We are all Americans and we are all human beings at the end of the day. It's tough to mend burnt bridges too.

So I am trying very hard to stick to researching issues where information is available and doing my best to corroborate sources to back up my opinions.

Marque and Reprisal Act of 2007 - Authorizes and requests the President to issue letters of marque and reprisal to commission privately armed and equipped persons and entities to seize outside of the United States the person and property of Osama bin Laden, of any al Qaeda co-conspirator, and any conspirator with Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda who are responsible for the air piratical aggressions against the United States on September 11, 2001, and for any planned similar acts or acts of war against the United States in the future.

States that no letter of marque and reprisal shall be issued without the posting of a security bond in such amount as the President determines sufficient to ensure the letter's execution.

Of course when he introduced it in 2001, it was "for the capture, alive or dead, of Osama bin Laden or any other al Qaeda conspirator"

September 11 Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001

<...>

(b) The President of the United States is authorized to place a money bounty, drawn in his discretion from the $40,000,000,000 appropriated on September 14, 2001, in the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Recovery from and Response to Terrorists Attacks on the United States or from private sources, for the capture, alive or dead, of Osama bin Laden or any other al Qaeda conspirator responsible for the act of air piracy upon the United States on September 11, 2001, under the authority of any letter of marque or reprisal issued under this Act.

22. Ron Paul favors using the Letter of Marque to use private armies and contractors

And you are making the same case for justifying the existence of companies like Booz Allen.

The Carlyle Group has been fined $20 million dollars for allegedly bribing a New York state employee millions of dollars. That's a huge legal violation to be alleged.

The Carlyle Group owns Booz Allen. So a group of investors who paid off millions of dollars in bribes controls one of the most important companies in the NSA private contractor conglomeration.

So would not Ron Paul be proven to be an idiot in trusting private corporations to run our military and espianage units?

The Carlyle Group via Booz Allen example is only one of many examples where private contractors and the military have proven to be a bad mix. Who can forget Blackwater USA!

Point being I don't believe the constitution was written to allow the kind of corporate malfeasance, illegal activity and corruption to flourish within the most sacred areas of America's Govt. No I think the founding father's would be appalled at what has transpired thanks to Bush and the Patriot Act.

Wikipedia: The Carlyle Group

Carlyle had entered into a joint venture with Riverstone Holdings, an energy and power focused private equity firm founded by former Goldman Sachs investment bankers. It was alleged that these payments were in fact bribes or kickbacks, made to pension officials who have been under investigation by New York State Attorney General, Andrew Cuomo. In May 2009, Carlyle agreed to pay $20 million in a settlement with Cuomo and accepted changes to its fundraising practices.

38. I'm saying it sucks and it was ever thus (nt)

42. Completely agree. While I am not against transparent (non secret) cooperation

between the public and private sector that is well regulated, I am against secret laws being used to shelter relationships between private for profit contractors and our spy agencies.

I apologize for misunderstanding and thinking you were supporting the use of the letters of marque to justify what happened in regards to private contractors like Booz Allen.

I do thank you for pointing out where one might try to justify military contractors via the letters of marque and
using it as a justification for the current relationships between Booz Allen, the NSA, & The Carlyle Group is basically indefensible.

The unpatriot act should be abolished and the bribery charges alleged against The Carlyle Group should be investigated by congress as well as how a person like Snowden working for a private contractor can be allowed to do so much damage to our national security.

There is no way in hell Booz Allen and The Carlyle Group deserve a pass on all this!

In light of the current events and the Carlyle Group paying a $20 million dollar fine for allegedly bribing a govt official there is no way in hell these private contractor relationships should be allowed to exist in secret!

31. I still haven't found a provision for secret interpretation of the law in the Constititution....

24. yeah.....

Totalitarian Police states are perfectly constitutional.
Everyone quit whining about "your rights" and tow the party line. Who cares that your grandchildren will be born without basic freedoms. Its all perfectly legal.

25. Congressional secrecy isn't the same as Executive secrecy....

...because with Congress there is a dispersion of power through its representational design that acts as a natural check against excess (look at what the Tea Baggers alone have done to Congress). And in the end, it can do nothing without the signature and the power of the Executive office to carry things out which also puts a check on their power.

However, what I don't recall ever seeing a provision for in the Constitution was one that allowed for the ''fast-tracking of Due Process'' through just one branch of the government with which to judge and sentence our citizens, as we're now doing. Particularly when the sentence being reached in some cases, is death.

Letters of Marque were issued as an aid in stopping the Barbary Pirates from commandeering American ships. Many being paid for by England. All the western European nations, to one extent or another, used Privateers (pirates who worked for governments) because no one had a standing army and/or navy large enough back then to threaten the whole world. Not like we do now.

And finally, if you look at the rosters of the NSA you'll see that a large number come from the MIC. This is a great way for them to appear a lot smaller than what they truly are, by simply contracting their work of surveilling the proles and the outer party members, out to the private sector. After a while you can't tell where the private sector ends and the public sector begins. Once you reach this point, you're already in fascism.

But I'm glad all this has ''conflict'' of opinion has spurned an interest into the letter of the law. Maybe if one reads long and hard enough, they'll also understand the spirit of those laws as well.

- Oh, and one of those founding fathers had this to say about men with power. I take his advice, literally:

40. No you aren't, you are actually offering examples from the past to excuse present problems

You are in fact holding up the early Founder's times as rational for our own actions. You are not saying 'it was not golden then' your OP and posts in thread say 'they did then what we are doing now so that makes it ok'.
Cake and eat it too. Pick one.

28. What was their stance on executive secrecy?

35. Most of them were alive and in Congress when Washington refused to make trade negotiations public

He had sent Jay to England with sealed instructions, Congress asked what those were, and he told them to fuck off. The Jeffersonian faction made a noise and then realized they couldn't really do anything about it.

34. I interpret this as even if it is secret, it can be entered on the Journal with 20% ...

of either House voting to make it so,

"...and the Yeas and Nays of the Members of either House on any question shall, at the Desire of one fifth of those Present, be entered on the Journal. "

Which is more than just the Intelligence Committee in the Senate and a couple of Leaders in the House. There needs to be at least 20% of the Senate or the House comprised of the "secrets" the government is holding.

36. I can see that interpretation

Though in practice the rules of the House separate the two clauses: on the one hand, the Speaker can declare some deliberations secret. On the other hand, Members can demand a recorded vote. I don't know that those two have ever come into conflict, but they may have.

45. There is indeed a problem and it revolves around the private contractor NSA relationship

This is compounded when the relationship is secret and not open to proper over site.

I'm not sure if you've seen where I've posted that the Carlyle Group was required to pay a $20 million dollar fine for allegedly bribing a govt employee with millions of dollars in 2009. The Carlyle group is an investment fund that owns Booz Allen.

Booz Allen investors allegedly bribing govt officials is a big deal in my eyes. Why on earth would we trust a company; who's primary investors are connected to bribing public officials; be allowed to oversee one our Govts most important functions?

Please check it out:

In March 2009, New York State and federal authorities began an investigation into payments made by Carlyle's Riverstone Holdings subsidiary to placement agents allegedly made in exchange for investments from the New York State Common Retirement System, the state's pension fund. In 2000, Carlyle had entered into a joint venture with Riverstone Holdings, an energy and power focused private equity firm founded by former Goldman Sachs investment bankers. It was alleged that these payments were in fact bribes or kickbacks, made to pension officials who have been under investigation by New York State Attorney General, Andrew Cuomo. In May 2009, Carlyle agreed to pay $20 million in a settlement with Cuomo and accepted changes to its fundraising practices.